|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
TN: NRA Releases New Anti-Bredesen Ad in Tennessee Senate Race
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The National Rifle Association released a new ad opposing Tennessee Democrat Phil Bredesen and supporting Republican Marsha Blackburn this week in the gun-rights group's latest foray into the hotly contested Senate race.
"The Supreme Court is divided," the ad begins. "Our right to self-defense hangs in the balance. If Phil Bredesen wins, Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein will destroy our right to self-defense."
The ad then goes on to advocate that Tennesseans vote for Bredesen's opponent. |
Comment by:
Stripeseven
(10/11/2018)
|
The People of America have never authorized their elected representatives to destroy their Bill of Rights. Citizens must demand that their elected officials be bound by the chains of the Constitution. Persons of little character, or honor disobey their oath.
|
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|